Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
0
Evaluation and career
Jolanta Šinkūnienė Vilnius University, Lithuania
The Research Council of Lithuania
Would I do it?
• TALK AT A NATIONAL CONFERENCE
• TALK AT AN INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE
• LECTURE TO SECONDARY SCHOOL PUPILS
• POPULAR SCIENCE ARTICLE
• SETTING UP A BLOG
• PEER REVIEW AT A NATIONAL JOURNAL
• ARTICLE IN PROFESSIONAL NON-RESEARCH
JOURNAL
• ARTICLE IN A LOCAL RESEARCH JOURNAL
1
Experience Skills Career
The publishing process (http://undsci.berkeley.edu)2
The publishing process
“There were over 1.1 million peer-reviewed research
articles published globally in English in 2005 and this
number has been increasing by 4 per cent annually”
(Hyland 2011: 173).
“Top general and specialty journals have an overall
rejection rate of about 85-90%. For instance, at AJScurrently, about 80% of manuscripts are rejected at the
initial review. About 20% are given revise and resubmits.
About 50% of the revise and resubmits subsequently are
accepted. So this is an overall rejection rate of 90%
(acceptance rate of 10%). ASR figures are strikingly
similar.”
(https://www.soc.umn.edu/~uggen/PeerReview.pdf)
3
The publishing process
But why papers are being rejected?
„There are formulations that, in my view, are a little bit over
the top and too pretentious. <...> Maybe it is not the
language, but it is just too Latin for a North-West
European.“ (Lillis & Curry 2010: 152)
„Poor writing doesn’t encourage the reader to turn the page
to read more about X. This comment is not about the
authors’ competence in scientific English. It is about thinking.“(Lillis & Curry 2010: 152)
4
Cross-cultural differences in research writing
Why would awareness of different cultural practices be
important in research writing?
“Ignorance of, or misconceptions about, the communication
styles of others can hinder understanding among
academics and ultimately obstruct cooperation and
advancement of scholarship” (Duszak 1997: 3).
“<...> by breaking rules of a text-linguistic type, a writer
may appear incoherent or illogical; by breaking culture-
specific rhetorical rules a writer may seem exotic and
command low credibility” (Mauranen 1993: 263).
5
Academic text: influencing factors 6
Big culture
(native language
writing culture)
(Atkinson 2004)
Academic Text
Small culture
(professional,
i.e.disciplinary
culture)
(Atkinson 2004)
Cultural differences: personal pronouns 7
Eastern Asia (China) 8
Mur Dueñas,
Šinkūnienė(2016)
Why personal pronouns are avoided?
Vassileva (1998: 181) refers to Clyne’s (1993) distinction
between “collective” and “individualistic” cultures: “the
Russian and Bulgarian discourses obviously favour the
‘collective approach’ resulting in ‘collective responsibility’”.
Sanderson (2008: 59): ‘Ich Verbot’ [I taboo]: “The avoidance
of explicit person reference is one way in which academics
attempt to conjure an impression of objectivity.”
Fløttum et al. (2006: 81, 113): the well-known French cultural
maxim ‘le moi haïssable’ traditionally taught in French
schools explains why “French researchers avoid the first
person singular and use the first person plural as little as
possible.”
9
Risks of rhetorical clashes (1)
Toliau apžvelgsime angliškojo should kiekybinius vartosenos ypatumus.
‘Now we will review the frequency distribution of should.’
Reviewer comment:
Aš tokių asmeninių formų vartojimo moksliniam tekste
labai nemėgstu... Su kuo Jūs rašote straipsnį? Juk viena,
tai kam tas MES?
‘I dislike such personal forms in research texts very much.
Who are you writing the article with? You are a single
author so why this WE?’
10
Risks of rhetorical clashes (2)
In Lithuanian linguistics people do not tend to take an explicit position on what they did, which is very well reflected in the verb argue, like In
this paper I argue this. Lithuanians are clearly missing on that. And then the impersonalisation or the lack of a clear position makes the article weaker. (Linguistics)
What then can we draw from this study in terms of pragmatics research in this area? Firstly, I suggest that more studies of the emotional aspects of interpersonal interaction using different methodologies could yield valuable insights. Secondly, more conceptualisation is needed on the meaning of ‘relational’, drawing on theorising and empirical findings from a range of sources. We need to take a wide range of data into account and to avoid pre-conceived ideological stances that may narrow down our conceptualisations too soon. Thirdly, I would argue that since relational issues are of such importance in the management field, a key aim of our work should be to develop conceptual frameworks that are meaningful and relevant to practicing managers. Ihope this exploratory study offers a small step in that direction.
11
Contrastive studies on hedging (1)
(1) It is possible – and likely – that readers of other genresand/or in other fields may attend to different textual featuresand construct the author's voice in different ways, if at all.
(2) This suggestion is, I think, reinforced by the observationthat the main verbs in (40)–(43) appear to serve the samefunction as the parentheticals and adverbials <...>.
(3) We speculate that this molecular marker may be a way ofdistinguishing patients <…>.
12
Contrastive studies in hedging (2)
Serbian
“Consistent failure to use epistemic hedges <…> may be an
instance of cultural behaviour in accordance with a
possible cultural script regulating ‘directness’ in Serbian.”
(Trbojevic Milosevic 2010)
Lithuanian
English researchers in linguistics and medicine used roughly
1.5 times more hedges than Lithuanian scholars in the
same disciplines (Šinkūnienė 2011).
13
Contrastive studies in hedging (3)
French
“French scientists are much more prescriptive, authoritative
and categorical than their English-speaking colleagues.”
(Salager-Meyer et al. 2003: 232).
Bulgarian
“The Bulgarian educational system presupposes mainly
reproductive writing and focuses rather more on the
content than on the structure of the texts.” (Vassileva
2001: 99)
14
Contrastive studies in hedging (4)
Finnish
“Arrogance and over self-confidence (that is, a lack of
hedging devices) have also been noted in Finnish
academic writing.” (Salager-Meyer 2011: 36)
Greek
“<…> Greek authors tend to project a rather authoritative and
knowledgeable persona, and their main persuasive
technique is the presentation of claims as certain,
consensual, and self-evident.” (Koutsantoni 2005: 127)
15
Contrastive studies in hedging (5)
Norwegian
“But why should English-speaking and Norwegian-speaking
researchers be more humble and polite and express
themselves with more caution than their French-speaking
colleagues? Norwegian academic culture is to a large extent
influenced by the Anglo-Saxon culture” (Vold 2006: 82).
German
“Research papers written in German and English by German
authors <...> show a higher degree of hedging and of
tentative affective statements than papers written in English
by English-speaking writers” (Salager-Meyer 2011: 36).
16
Publish (in English) or perish dilemma (1)
Lillis & Curry (2010: 137) talk about
publication hierarchy: “local publications”
(in local languages & national journals)
are frequently considered as of lower
value in comparison to “global publications”
(in English & international journals).
Publish (in English) or perish dilemma (2)
“The number of non-native English speaking academics
publishing in English language journals now exceeds
papers authored by native English speakers." (Hyland
2011: 173)
18
"English is the universal language of science" (ThR)
The story of Cranio-mandibular muscle (Swales & Feak
2000)
First fully described in a publication in German in 1954Then “discovered” by Portuguese scientists in 1978Finally “discovered” for the English-speaking world in 1996!
19
Cross-disciplinary insights into academic discourse (1)
“An individual‘s sense of belonging to his or her academic
tribe is manifested in a variety of ways. A chemist‘s desk
is prone to display three-dimensional models of complex
molecular structures, an anthropologist‘s walls are
commonly adorned with colourful tapestries and
enlarged photographic prints of beautiful black people,
while mathematician may boast no more than a
chalkboard scribbled over with algebraic symbols.”
(Becher 1989: 23)
20
Cross-disciplinary insights into academic discourse (2)
“It is, however, through the medium of language that some
of the more fundamental distinctions emerge. A detailed
analysis of disciplinary discourse can help <...> to
discern differences in the modes in which arguments are
generated, developed, expressed and reported, and to
tease out the epistemological implications of the ways in
which others’ work is evaluated.” (Becher 1989: 23)
21
Acknowledgments (1)
(1) We are grateful for funding under Research GrantFD/00236B from the Leverhulme Trust <...>. We alsothank seminar participants at ISER and Swansea aswell as the referees and editor for extensive and helpfulcomments on this article. (Eko AN 4)
(2) Many thanks to Robyn Carston and Deirdre Wilson for numerous discussions on the subject of this paper and their comments on several drafts. I’m also grateful to Eliza Kitis, Chris Potts, Su Olmos, an anonymous referee, and, especially, Kent Bach for feedback on earlier versions of the paper. (Klb AN 6)
Acknowledgments (2) 23
Acknowledgments: disciplinary variation
“Cronin, McKenzie, and Rubio (1993) discovered disciplinary
variations in the frequency of acknowledgements,
suggesting a continuum across the soft-hard spectrum,
with virtually all articles in the hard sciences carrying one
(McCain, 1991).
Philosophers, for instance, are more likely to inhabit
dispersed communities with little reliance on close
interaction with others and so have low acknowledgement
rates. Hard scientists, in contrast, recognize financial
support and their engagements in highly developed webs
of mutual transmission and exchange, trading the
materials and preprints upon which their research
depends.” (Hyland 2003: 245)
24
Acknowledgments: cultural variation
(3) Straipsnis parašytas vykdant Lietuvos valstybinio mokslo irstudijų fondo (LVMSF) remiamą projektą „X“. (Soc LT 1)
‘The article was written within the project “X” funded by the State
Science and Studies Foundation of Lithuania.’
(4) Tyrimas atliktas ir straipsnis parašytas, vykdant Lietuvosmokslo tarybos (LMT) finansuojamą projektą ,,X“ (MIP-14/2010).
Autorė nuoširdžiai dėkoja projektą finansavusiai LMT. (Klb LT
15)
‘The research was conducted and article written within project
“X” (MIP-14/2010) funded by the Research Council of
Lithuania.
The author expresses sincere thanks to the Research Council of
Lithuania for the funding.’
25
The opinion of informants (1)
Mes vieniši kūrėjai. Recenzentai – jeigu tu publikuoji ir tai yra,bet kas jie yra tu nežinai, galima dėkoti, kad tiesiog skaitė.Aš niekada nesu dėkojus. Nebuvau tiek dėkinga. Labaidažnai recenzija frustraciją sukelia. (Lit Inf 1)
‘We are lonely scholars. Reviewers – if you publish, and if
there are reviewers, but you do not know who they are, you
can thank them for reading. I have never thanked anyone. I
wasn’t that grateful. Very frequently the review causes
frustration.’
26
The opinion of informants (2)
Taip, aš turiu kolegą, kuri kiekvieną savo tekstą atsiunčia. Bet niekad nedėkoja. Man tai taip savaime suprantama. Kažką patariu pakeist, čia kompozicija, čia pavadinimas... Bet dėkojimas... mums neįprasta, mes tai suvokiam kaip būtinybę, orą, kuriuo kvėpuoji. (Lit Inf 2)
‘Yes, I have a colleague who sends me every text she’s
written. But she never thanks me. It is so understandable
to me. I normally suggest some changes, composition of
the text, title … But thanking … we are not used to that,
we understand this as necessity, as the air that we
breathe.’
27
The opinion of informants (3)
Viena vertus nėra normos, kita vertus nėra už ką dėkoti. Pats procesas yra toks, kad į jį neįsiterpia kiti <...>. O ten [Vakaruose] visas departamentas skaito, keletas žmonių, ir čia pat pateikinėja konkrečias pastabas ko pats tu nebūtum sugalvojęs <...> tai neparašyti padėkojimo, tai savotiškai apsivogti. (Soc Inf 1)
‘On the one hand there is no tradition, on the other hand
there is nobody to thank. The whole process is such that
other people do not interfere. And there [in western
universities] the whole department reads your article,
several people, and they give you specific suggestions
which you’d never think of yourself. So not to
acknowledge this would be like a kind of theft.’
28
The "insider" knowledge
• The importance of keeping disciplinary and cultural
epistemological practices in mind to appear as an insider
of that disciplinary community.
29
The "insider" knowledge
The aspect of negative or positive politeness, especially in
expressing criticism. As Walter Nash (1990: 20) jokingly
puts it:
“Never, never say „Professor X is a jackass”, or even
„Professor X is wrong.“ Say, rather, „Notwithstanding the
great learning and skill that Professor X deploys in
defense of a highly original thesis, the book leaves some
important questions unanswered.“ This tells the world
that you are moderate and judicious and that Professor
X is a jackass.”
30
The "insider" knowledge
“As academics, we are not disposed to say, „I know the
world is round.“ Our tendency is toward propositions
stoutly hedged and qualified, and shored up with
evidential timber: „It has been convincingly argued that
for figurative purposes (Slipstream, 1968a) as well as in
a cosmological perspective (Nobodaddy, Merriweather,
et al., 1981) the earth (Tellus) has, approximately
speaking, the properties of an oblate sphere.“ The
retreat from stout and simple assertion is due not only to
respect for strict truth; it is also motivated by something
perhaps less admirable but wholly human: the urge to
deflect criticism and avoid blame”. (Nash 1990: 20)
31
